Retrieve a platform's parameter types, ranges, units, meanings, and source data to configure accurate, game-ready gun models in Blender.
A platform's parameters (type, range or choices, unit, meaning) and the sources its real numbers come from.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | No | a platform id, e.g. ar15 | ar15 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the shape of the returned content (type, range/choices, unit, meaning, and number sources), which is useful, but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions, or whether the platform argument must exist first.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One tight sentence with no filler or redundancy. However, it opens as a noun phrase rather than leading with the action, which slightly weakens front-loading.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description adequately conveys what comes back (metadata plus number sources). It remains incomplete on usage context and behavioral characteristics, but the tool's low complexity limits how much more is needed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single optional 'platform' parameter (default ar15), so the schema already documents it. The phrase 'A platform's parameters' reinforces the per-platform scoping but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names the resource (a platform's parameters) and enumerates the content returned (type, range/choices, unit, meaning, sources), but it is a noun phrase with no action verb, so the agent must infer that it retrieves/describes parameter metadata. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as list_references or list_platforms.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no stated prerequisites, and no reference to alternative sibling tools that might supply related platform information. The agent is left to infer when this lookup is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.